We performed a comparison between IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe and NetApp AFF based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two All-Flash Storage solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The speed is the most valuable feature, along with the ease of getting it connected. We were able to get it online in less than a day."
"The solution offers amazing performance."
"Pure Storage is extremely reliable — it's never failed."
"The best feature is consistently lower latency, even when IOPS crank up to over 75K. The product maintains submillisecond response time, which is incredible."
"The initial setup was straightforward in the way that it was a database vacuum storage."
"As soon as we introduced our first Pure Storage FlashArray, the first benefit was at least twice the performance increase. Our production databases simply ran twice as fast with no other change."
"It is the SAN backbone for our company."
"The deduplication and compression rates are beyond impressive."
"It's easy to use, has good stability, and many features."
"The high performance and high availability improved our overall processes."
"The most valuable feature is the speed."
"What I like about the product are its high availability, maximum efficiency in performance, and its ability to handle a high level of I/O operations."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its upgrades, as we don't have to do much homework because of its different controllers."
"Its ease of use, performance, and hardware compression is very useful feature."
"The solution is more available for IOPS warehousing, resolving issues, and reporting than other products."
"Good performance with a user-friendly UI."
"The most valuable feature, primarily, would be speed. That's why we got it. Storage is costly but it's very, very fast. Very efficient, very fast."
"The tool's most valuable feature is SVM. I also like the speed and response of the filers."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is data protection and snapshot technology for backup."
"Its consistent stability is one of the things that I like, and the performance is also very good."
"It is a stable solution."
"The file-based protocol supports NFS and CIFS."
"AFF works well for VMware storage."
"Organizations can reduce data storage footprint and lower power and cooling costs, helping to adopt "Green IT.""
"We understand that they're thinking about it, but one of the things that would be nice is if they added some basic file-level capabilities to the platform. The idea is that they would run a basic NFS or CIF share from the controllers. FlashBlade is the powerhouse for File and Object storage, but if you don't need all that power, a lightweight file function would make FlashArrays more versatile."
"They have a product, FlashBlade, which is their object storage integration, and that's something that we haven't integrated with yet. This might be an area for additional focus as it would play into scalability, because the very nature of object storage is that it's infinitely scalable."
"A three wave application or multi wave application synchronization would be an improvement."
"The connectivity needs improvement. You do not have the possibility to have a file and block connectivity at the same time on the same machine. It has limited ability to do so."
"Had some issues with Purity not being entirely compatible with VMware ESXi."
"The number of Filesystems is limited, which it is not on the EMC VNX."
"We would like more extended historical data to help with some of the capacity planning. This is something that we are asking for all the time. E.g., what was the historical performance of this particular volume? So, we would like more historicals."
"Having something native in the Pure Storage ecosystem would make it integrated and in one single company, and we wouldn't have to work with multiple organizations."
"There is a tool provided by IBM for repairing batteries which can only be utilized by those who have an IBM technical advisor under service contract. However, for individuals who do not have such a contract, the tool can be difficult to use and requires a zip file copy. I believe that it would be greatly beneficial if the tool were made more user-friendly and accessible for all individuals who need to repair batteries."
"I would like to have replication functionality built directly in the product, rather than having to use a separate device for this."
"IBM's support is not good. I experienced a big problem where I opened the console IBM Storage and would see that something was broken. I called the call centers, and I said, "I have a problem. My drive is not working." They want me to give them the serial number, I gave it to them and they told me "I cannot find your product. Your product is not here.""
"The storage system itself should have built-in capabilities for different ransomware attacks."
"Deduplication and compression should be improved."
"IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe is an expensive solution, and its pricing could be improved."
"Other vendors have included a block and file system. IBM doesn't include a file system. And yet, it's very necessary for all organizations' networks to have file systems. We have other systems for the file system, however, ideally, we would like to have one system with these features."
"I would like to see IBM products become more affordable because they can be quite expensive, which limits their accessibility to a broader customer base."
"The admin tools and the integration with other products and clouds can be improved. It should also be easier to identify and troubleshoot problems in this solution. It takes a long time, and it should be improved."
"Technical support is a little lackluster. Some of the issues that we've had were opening up tickets. They seem to be routed in the wrong direction or it takes one or two days to get a call back for simple tasks."
"We only had a few upgrade issues."
"The graphical interface is still heavy and slow. Needs more improvement in this area."
"I would like to see an improvement in the high availability of the NFS and CIFS sharing during upgrade and patching; this would help to avoid downtime."
"The total cost of ownership has increased a little."
"I would like them to roll in global monitoring instead of having to buy another product for it."
"There is room for improvement in terms of support. I have noticed that if I sometimes call their customer care for a particular issue, they will give me another number and ask me to call that other team. It would be better if they could do a warm transfer. That would save customers time from calling all the numbers again and speaking to another team."
IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe is ranked 13th in All-Flash Storage with 19 reviews while NetApp AFF is ranked 2nd in All-Flash Storage with 280 reviews. IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe is rated 8.8, while NetApp AFF is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe writes "Steady performance, responsive support, and high availability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NetApp AFF writes "Since switching, our clients have reported improved performance and reduced latency". IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform, IBM FlashSystem and HPE Primera, whereas NetApp AFF is most compared with Dell PowerStore, Dell Unity XT, Lenovo ThinkSystem DM Series, VMware vSAN and NetApp FAS Series. See our IBM FlashSystem 9100 NVMe vs. NetApp AFF report.
See our list of best All-Flash Storage vendors and best NVMe All-Flash Storage Arrays vendors.
We monitor all All-Flash Storage reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.